The Labor enquirer., 1887-12-17


creation. 1t assumes that Social
lists desire system under which
every one shall be under govern
ment employ, the government ap-
parently fulfilling the same sort of
function as the master of a fac
tory-which horrible creation of
the authors brain fills even him
with dismay. Now l am free to
admit that very foolish PROPOSE
tions are sometimes made by
those who imagine themselves So
cialists, but have never properly
understood the question, which
are made the most of by our ene-
mics; but | am sure that no So
cialist of any authority ever advo-
Gated the creation of such a many
headed monster as DR.. Hill de-
scribes. Rather our aim lies ex-
actly in the opposite direction;
instead of a government to rule
the people, we need a people who
can and will rule the government,
making it, such as it is, the instru-
ment for the carrying out of their
wishes. Such government all
might take part in, for it would
be identified with the people and
would no longer be government
in the older sense of the word.
Cooperation would be such that
every citizen would have a hand
in and be directly responsible for
the welfare of his town. wherein
land and capital would be held in
common for the common good.
Administrators and overseers there
might be, but as the servants not
the rulers of the people.
Under Socialism, we are told,
there would be no industry owing
to the lack of private enterprise!
1t lis poor compliment to the hu-
man race to assume that the only
motive that will make a man be-
stir himself is that of fleeing his
neighbor! AS a matter of fact it
is perfectly well known that all
the best work in the worlds done.
not only without the exhorbitant
reward which the author assumes
to be its motive, but actually for
far less than is due it, if not in
the teeth of opposition. Denver
was built by certain bricklayers
and masons who worked indus
triously at their task and received
their reward, minus very consid-
erable sum which went into the
pockets of idle capitalists. Under
Socialism they would receive the
| full value of their work and the
idlers nothing; and l fail to see
why the higher wages should de-
stroy their zeal for work, though
| can quite see that such an ar
rangement would prove unsatis-
factory to 1.-THE capitalists-but
then they did nothing before, and
couldn't do less, so it is difficult to
show where the loss comes in. In
one direction certainly Socialism
tends to check enterprise; mean
that form of private enterprise
called stealing. There is no doubt
a very large class Of persons, most
of them very wealthy, so occupied,
and it really seems pity to check
their operations. But even DR..
Hill would probable desire pre-
ventative measures against man
who appropriated his watch, CIV
ing nothing in return; so he will
not accuse US of undue cruelty in
seeking to suppress or divert into
a more benehcent channel the en-
terprise which robs US of half our
livelihood and fattens on our own
life-blood. After all. we would be
generous; if it should be necessa-
ry for the general welfare to de-
prive these gentry of their accus-
toned work, and. if they should
not be able to turn to anything
honest in their old age. there are
still prisons and poor-honses pro-
vided where We would maintain